pooltuna

treat it like a constructive raise :P 3♥

My responder is showing a hand which is exactly constructive, whereas gwnn's responder is showing "8+". Is that the part that you missed, or were you hoping for a more general exposition of the advantages of making bids whose range is limited? I misunderstood gwnn's take on the position and agree that the call should be limited otherwise the opener gets preempted into a swamp.

you need to reproduce the whole dummy and your whole hand as well as the complete auction if you expect reasonable answers. Altho since I have made my bed I am inclined to lie in it so probably will play an encouraging ♣ on the first 2 leads of the suit planing on winning the third lead so I can run the suit. BTW how do we know if partner led 8 from 8xx as opposed to 8xxx?

It might (I'm not sure) be better to play the transfer as weak or invitational+, and the direct raise as exactly constructive. That gains when we're bidding constructively, but loses a bit by letting advancer double or cue-bid over the weak raise. I seem to have missed what the gains are for a direct constructive raise as opposed to a constructive transfer raise.

Let the opponents make the last guess? Yes I do so I pass here and bid 4♠ over 4♥ B)

Yep. Given the auction anyone that expects partner to come up with extras I would think is dreaming. Isn't one of the meta-agreements for a splinter a narrow range of expected values for the bidding? Not saying there is no slam just that it is unreasonable to expect partner to hold [hv=s=sxxxxxhkxxxdqcakx]133|100|[/hv]

IMO this needs to be a constructive raise to reduce the effects of opps X and the 2M qbid. Consequently your 2M bid is equivalent to a raise that would go thru a F1NT auction (i.e. uncontested)

He could have held it when South bid 4♦ but not after he bid 4♥

Now I look longingly at 2N, wishing I had the courage to bid it, before I settle on 3♥. Heck, wait a second, this is matchpoints and not teams? I only have to answer to one person for masterminding, not look at three disapproving faces? Dammit, I'm in! 2N! Not quite sure I follow this. If I were going to bid notrump, I would bid three. If I were going to bid hearts, I would bid four (since I would bid three without both the queen of hearts and the ace of diamonds - I am in balancing position, am I not?) But maybe I can double, and bid 3♥ over partner's next action. That is what I would do in direct seat if my queen of clubs were the ace, so in balancing seat maybe I can do it with my actual hand. I could also bid 3♠, if that asked partner to bid 3NT with a spade guard. True, on the actual hand I will need him to have something else also, but he can't always have a Yarborough (or even if he can, I should not necessarily bid as though he does). Put me down for double. After all, if spades are the opponents' 6-0 fit, that might be an easier way to make a living than guessing to bid something now. I'm sold put me down for X 2 b ->3♥

oh! I didn't realize partner was not allowed to bid 4♠ with [hv=s=sktxxxxhxxdqxckxx]133|100|[/hv] :) :)

Yep! IMO to XX at this point is a borrow request for my tantō (短刀)

WJS has a price and this is part of that price

North didn't envision South's problem very well he should not give up and either try 6♣ or 5♠. After all North could have held [hv=s=sxxhakxxdaqxxcxxx]133|100|[/hv]

It probably varies but for me it tells partner "This is our hand" And what does it say if anything, about your suits? nothing I don't play "tends to show no fit" altho I do use Jordan so it is sort of implied

It probably varies but for me it tells partner "This is our hand"

100% to those conniving bastards E and W

yeah the light openers have it easy here. I expect the auction would go 1♣ (2♥) X (P); 3♠ (P) 4♠ all pass. Count this as a case for opening light.

Bite the bullet and bid 6♠ There are too many minimal opening hands where you make 6. If you bite the dust as a result well that can happen too but I think the odds are in your favor.

This would be a hell of a lot easier if you set up the diagram with enough information that tells who dealt where the hands you are showing are in relation to the dealer rather than expecting us to figure it out. Jeez you have been posting here how long and you can't even make life simpler for the rest of us? Now that that is off my chest I think South needs to bear the brunt of the blame He stepped way off the reservation with 4♠ and consequently bears any fault incurred by his side.

The upper hand, the first hand posted, I would normally call that North but no indication that is correct - 100% of the blame first error rule applies :) His hand is too good for a Limit raise, not by much but a singleton, the trump queen and a side AK combo is worth a GF.

Okay I will. I suggest you play the K.I.S.S. version of whatever they like.

so you are saying declarer found a 3♣ call holding [hv=s=sxhxdkqjxckqjxxxx]133|100|[/hv]

Hey!!! This is the BBO Forum. :o That being said IMO, all of us probably mastermind a little bit because we are generally pretty good at analysing hands and it is something we have to guard against.

no -X in an auction where partner almost surely holds 4♥s is really ugly I shoot low with 2♣

I suspect since this rates to be one your main trick sources that it be based on probablilty which means Hxxxx rather than HHxxx.